Russian close calls with the West in 2014

[Vici Supreme]

Some of you may already know the article while others don't.
For those who don't, the European Leadership Network just released an interesting article on the 40 most noteworthy encounters between Russia and the West in 2014 provided all together in a map.

http://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/dangerous-brinkmanship-close-military-encounters-between-russia-and-the-west-in-2014_2101.html

Regards!

[Pergite!]

You mean like this?



Photo taken 2014-10-03 IIRC.

[Dutchie999]

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

You mean like this?



Photo taken 2014-10-03 IIRC.

Holy **** that is close! Didn't an Soviet plane during the cold war crash alongside an American carrier?

[lowchi]

reminds me of this:
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_287.shtml

[chrisol]

I was reading in Polmar's Cold War Submarines, that they reckon there were about 20-40 collisions between US and USSR nuclear submarines in the cold war, mostly due to trailing operations.

[Triode]

"collisions" is "light" word, I think

[Spookyashell]

They keep flying along the Norwegian coast border now too with SU-34's and TU-95's

Article in Norwegian, but 2 Pictures from october 2014 of SU-34 followed by Norwegian F-16's.

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/forsv ... /23333831/

Also, there was a near miss earlier this year between a Scandinavian Airline Systems Boing 737 and a russian figther. They were 70 meters apart when the 737 took evasive actions.
Russians are provocing Nato these days, but I Guess Nato is provocing them too by expanding to the east.

[thewood1]

Not just Europe and NA...

http://www.news.com.au/national/third-a ... 7122396768

[Figeac]

Here too: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... o-26855206

[Dutchie999]

NATO has 6 times the population of Russia. It's combined economic output is 16 times bigger then Russia's. NATO spends 11 times more on it's military then Russia. Or to put it into other terms: it is basically 6 similarly sized countries versus one that have 2,5 times the economy and spend 2 times as much on its military as the other one.

So count me not worried.

[SSN754planker]

The great equalizer in your equation sits in silos in the Urals. And a perceived view by the West that Russia may be a bit looser on using them than we may be.

[Dutchie999]

ORIGINAL: SSN754planker

The great equalizer in your equation sits in silos in the Urals. And a perceived view by the West that Russia may be a bit looser on using them than we may be.

Yes but nuclear weapons are useless weapons. If you use them you can expect a full strike back which basically ends up in total war and the destruction of planet Earth. That is the reason that the cold war never became a hot war. There was (and is) no winnable situation. Everyone looses.

[Spookyashell]

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999


NATO has 6 times the population of Russia. It's combined economic output is 16 times bigger then Russia's. NATO spends 11 times more on it's military then Russia. Or to put it into other terms: it is basically 6 similarly sized countries versus one that have 2,5 times the economy and spend 2 times as much on its military as the other one.

So count me not worried.

But don't you know why we spend so much more?
The F-22's and the F-35's are "employment" projects. The plane could have been built for a fraction of the cost.
But in order to get political support for the programs the wings are built in one state, cockpits in another and so on and so forth.
Also they had to "sell out" production of subsystems to partner countries to get them to join up. Then ship it all back and forth.

Don't think for a second that the US gets the most bang for their bucks. They might spent a hell of a lot more, but only have like a 10% lead.

[Mgellis]

Just curious, aside from simply searching newspaper databases like Infotrac, where would you go to find data about similar close encounters in earlier years. Is there an "annual report" about such things or anything like that? Does NATO or the U.N. keep track of such things (and make the data available to the public)? Thanks.

[Dutchie999]

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell
But don't you know why we spend so much more?
The F-22's and the F-35's are "employment" projects. The plane could have been built for a fraction of the cost.
But in order to get political support for the programs the wings are built in one state, cockpits in another and so on and so forth.
Also they had to "sell out" production of subsystems to partner countries to get them to join up. Then ship it all back and forth.

Don't think for a second that the US gets the most bang for their bucks. They might spent a hell of a lot more, but only have like a 10% lead.

Western-world costs are twice as high. I admit that I should have mentioned the economic numbers with GDP adjusted for PPP. That sounds a bit to much like a conspiracy theory. But no doubt that they could have been built cheaper. And the subcontracting of different parts of the project has both positive and negative effects one of them being: a lot of transport costs. Although I doubt that for the entire program they amount more then a procent of the total cost.

Every society has problems with efficiency, corruption, politics etc. Russia is certainly not immune to that. One can argue (given the history of Russia and the Soviet Union) that they are more prone to that.

What do you mean with "They might spent a hell of a lot more, but only have like a 10% lead"? A 10% lead in what? Certainly not in numbers.

[jdkbph]

...

[jdkbph]

hehehe... seems putin is getting uppity of late. small pen is syndrome no doubt.

someone will eventually get tired of his antics, smack him on the snout with a rolled up newspaper, and he'll slink back into obscurity.

in the mean time, defense industry and military lobbyists are going to make the most of it. this may even result in new toys or new scenarios for us to play with...

jd

[Dutchie999]

ORIGINAL: jdkbph

In the mean time, defense industry and military lobbyists are going to make the most of it. This may even result in new toys or new scenarios for us to play with...

For the American or Russian side? [;)]

[jdkbph]

The BLUE guys. US, NATO, etc.

JD

[Spookyashell]

Check out this newly released video of a Russian fighter nearly ramming a Norgewian F-16. You hear the Norwegian pilot say "Oh hell" then he breaks hard left and then a Russian fighter go past him on the right hand side.

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/forsv ... /23346710/